harrypotterfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Magic
Electromagnetism? Wandmaker 22:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)I read in Wikipedia that, as too much magic in the air could destroy electronics, that magic could be an electromagnetic force. I'm not saying it is, but the possibility exists. Does anyone think that it should be added to the page? (not as a fact, but as a theory). Wandmaker 22:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Why so serious? Why is this article so heavily protected? It seems to make it unnecessarily difficult to make edits. I think it would be better to move it down to semi-protection, like the Lord Voldemort page. A number of Serious Problems here ...which I think need to be addressed. As I see them, they are: Problem #1 Wait, what? That's an oxymoron. This urgently either needs a citation or else needs to be removed, with a new canonical definition added in its stead. Problem #2 The Different types of magic" section seems very inaccurate and untidy. Firstly, it doesn't distinguish between branches of magic and branches of magical study (which is important considering the section is only concerned with the former). Spells, Potions, Alchemy, Divination, the Dark Arts, Wandlore (probably) & all their subdivisions are forms of magic and should be included. Magizoology & Herbology are subjects and Mediwizard is neither - its an employer. This sectio needs to be rectified to comply with this. Problem #3 The Five Exceptions sub-section of "Limits" is just wrong. Firstly, we don't actually know what Gamp's Elemental Law of Transfiguration is, we only know its exceptions. Secondly, we only know one exception (food) the others are pure speculation, particularly since the other exceptions might not even be limits on what you can & cannot conjure like the first; for example, the second exception might be "you can't transfigure a petticoat into a water buffalo" for all we know. In light of these facts, the section should be rewritten from: Problem #4 to: Problem #5 In regards to the limits section again, where was this rule against immortality mentioned? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but as far as I'' can garner, there isn't. Indeed, in the Philosopher's stone Dumbeldore talks about how the eponymous stone could give you "as much money and life as you could want!" (page 215), which implies the opposite. The section needs to be rewritten to take this into account and/or provide some citations for the opposite case (if there indeed is one). Problem #6 ''Again the limits section, this time the Love/Blood magic subsection, which not only has a bad title (I don't think forward strokes are appropriate) but is itself inappropriate - the inability of Voldemort to kill Harry is not a "limit" of magic, its just how the sacrificial protection works and is hence not relevant (and therefore should be removed. These all need to be fixed soonGreen Zubat 23:16, July 9, 2011 (UTC) What magic is. Magic is a power that was gifted to the earth beings from angels. Thehelper1 01:34, March 31, 2012 (UTC) Another Bio on Magic There's another bio on "Magic" I wanted to put you on to. It's a page at the "Guide to the Mythological Universe," which has numerous bios on prominent and obscure gods and goddesses and their places in the media, and yes, it is my site. As such, the Magic bio was adapted to reflect the most popular appearances of mystical beings in the media, from "Sabrina" to "Dark Shadows" to "Wizards of Waverly" and even the "Harry Potter" franchise. I've always been interested in getting an opinion from someone on the page with a passion for Harry Potter and how close it relates and what it might need to expand on a subject that still needs clarifying. Please check it out and tell me what you think. http://www.angelfire.com/tv2/collinwood/magic00.html Thor2000 (talk) 00:22, December 30, 2014 (UTC) Someone needs to fix a messed up ref on the Transfiguration section, end of second paragraph. I'm not sure how. Zane T 69 (talk) 01:28, December 15, 2016 (UTC)